Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/Review

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RaCha'ar (talk | contribs) at 18:27, 27 February 2006 (→Progress summary: question). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

   WikiProject Final Fantasy    Welcome to the WikiProject Final Fantasy Review!

Please see the main page for instructions on how to use the review. Click here to start a new review, and be sure to use {{WPFF Review}} template. If you need any help, post what you can and someone will work out the edit for you.
For archived reviews, please click here.


Black Mage

  • Article: Black Mage
  • Review: User:TabulaRasa submitted this article for peer review, as of yet unknown reason.
  • Submitted: DarkEvil, 03:44, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Status: Open

A pretty good article overall. You'll want some citations (probably footnote style). I also thing another image toward the bottom, or perhaps an old-school black mage image would really help out. The prose is pretty good. More later. Deckiller 21:56, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It may also need a slight copyedit, with mdashes and fixes to contractions. It's concise, which is good. Deckiller 21:58, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Character Class articles

As pointed out once or twice before, the various character class articles are still a bit of a mess (with some notable exceptions such as Blue Mage, post- Riff's updates, Black Mage and Summoner (character class)). However, even the higher quality articles have no consistent style, which as some of you might guess really chaps my hide =), and as a whole, not even a consistent naming convention! I thought I'd formally put the whole lot of them under review and elicit some comments from you lot =)

Some suggestions to start the ball rolling:

  • Rename all articles to fit the currently favoured Classname (character class) standard
  • Rename all articles to a new format: Classname (Final Fantasy), thus allowing us to trim the references to non-FF games
  • Determine an article layout and describe it in the Style guide
  • Get to work implementing our decisions!

The floor is yours. >Gamemaker 00:51, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm always concerned when it comes to the articles involving the character classes. They're so messy and lack any standard. I'll look into this one when I get a free minute :) — CuaHL 00:08, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I just joined the project almost entirely because of this issue. Over at Final Fantasy XI it was tentatively decided that all the individual job information that was taking over about 25% of the article should be moved off onto the individual job class's pages. As explained further in the talk page for that article, I ran into problems doing this because of the lack of standardization for the job class articles across the board, and the fact that not every page is limited to FF jobs. I feel that there's a precedent for individual job articles for different games, and the FF series' significant standing in the annals of RPG history would seem to indicate that FF jobs could merit their own pages. I'm supporting the second suggestion on your list, Gamemaker. It would make sizing down the FFXI page a lot easier and would cut down on arguments of the type going on on the Paladin talk page right now. Of course, the consensus there seems to be towards merging all games together... this is a tricky subject. -RaCha'ar 18:42, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the pointer to the Paladin article, that one's been overlooked! I too would favour having FF-specific articles, editors who care about other games can then do as they will. Of course, notability is an issue: if there's nothing worthwhile to say about a particular class, then it doesn't need an article. I think a List of Final Fantasy character classes might be a decent starting point, in keeping with the various other Final Fantasy lists, and those classes sufficiently notable can link off that. >Gamemaker 22:55, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've made a start on such a list here. >Gamemaker 17:47, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, the list looks really good so far. I'm excited that there's some momentum going on this.  :) I think I'm going to start working on a template for the aforementioned "sufficiently notable" job class's individual pages. At the moment I favor a format like that on White Mage, with a general overview of how the class functions across the series, then a more specific short paragraph about how the job functions in a particular FF game. I like the articles being a look at the character class through FF "history," especially since it helps people (like me) who got on the wagon a little late see how the traditions have been handed down and changed through the different installations. A question though, how are we going to determine a job's "notability"? Straw polls? A rule about "the job must appear in X number of games"? -RaCha'ar 18:27, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
D'oh! It appears there's already a list of Final Fantasy character classes! That saves a bit of work at least. Regarding determining a job's notability, its a matter of how much appropriate information can be related about the job. If there's no more than a couple of paragraphs that can be written then that info can happily live in the list article. >Gamemaker 10:08, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know that list existed either, which is a shame because it's a very good summary of the job classes. Can we agree that a format like that in White Mage or Black Mage is how we want all job pages to appear? If so I'd like to volunteer to start creating "Class (Final Fantasy)" pages for jobs. My tentative list of notable jobs: White Mage, Black Mage, Red Mage, Blue Mage, Summoner, Warrior, Monk, Samurai, Ninja, Dragoon/Dragon Knight, Thief, Dark Knight, Paladin, Ranger/Archer/Hunter. Gambler, Beastmaster/Morpher (which could arguably be incorporated into the Blue Mage page - VERY arguably), Bard/Dancer, Chemist, Geomancer, and Mimic are all questionable for notability as far as I'm concerned, as I think they're covered perfectly well in their short descriptions on the character class list. However, as my FF knowledge begins with FFVII (I know, I know, I've missed some of the best games, sue me) I may not be the best person to determine the notability of jobs that featured prominently in the earlier installments. -RaCha'ar 18:38, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It may be appropriate to rename some of the existing pages, which I think is an admin job - maybe someone else could opine on that? Also, I'm not familiar with all the class articles yet, but personally I wouldn't include all of those... I actually removed the WPFF claim over the Paladin article today, as there was no info in it that didn't already live in the master list. Even the Warrior article contains no further information other than some extended FFXI details - I'd have moved that today if I knew my way around the FFXI pages better, and taken the Warrior page out of consideration too =) >Gamemaker 23:52, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd also like to suggest an update to the {{FF jobs}} template. I would change the header to "Notable Final Fantasy character classes" (non-linking), and add an explicit link to the master list. I nearly did this just now but it may be too far-reaching a change to implement until some of the class articles are modified/merged/whatever. >Gamemaker 12:45, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've kind of adopted the Blue Mage article, so I plan to edit it based on the White Mage article, and maybe improve upon that. Riff 07:54, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of the better class articles, like RaCha'ar I'm leaning towards the Black Mage article as a good template, with a dash of White Mage and Summoner (character class) thrown in. How about this for a layout template: >Gamemaker 14:11, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Intro

Standard wiki intro paragraph

Speciality

Description of the unique features of the class

History and description

Traditional distinguishing features and development of the class throughout the series

Reference (optional)

Cultural/external influences on the class

Other appearances (optional)

eg, White Mage in 8-Bit Theatre
  • I like it, it's simple, it'll make it easy to follow when constructing/developing articles. I'd say go with that.

By the way, what's the plural for a mage? Doesn't seem to be any conclusive decision on it, some say mage is the plural, others say magi or magus.Riff 14:39, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After taking a look at each page, Gamemaker, I think you could easily incorporate almost every one of those into that Final Fantasy character classes page, and, perhaps, even should. With most of them, the info on their individual pages is comparable to what's already on the list. The only ones I can reason keeping seperate are Black Mage, Warrior (because it's not just for Final Fantasy Warriors), and maybe, maaaybe Dragon Knight and Summoner.

If at all possible, I'd shoot for combining them all into the list with some standarized presentation of information. I imagine that even the Black Mage, Dragon Knight, and Summoner pages will look remarkably smaller after they've been ran through that template (which I think is a good one, by the way).

My two pesos. Ryu Kaze 16:33, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. The plural of Mage is indeed Magi. Ryu Kaze 16:34, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, here's my only reluctance about doing that, and since I've had a lot of trouble getting anyone working on the FFXI article to help me with this, I'll ask you guys. The options for shortening the FFXI article with regards to the jobs page were my preference - to move the descriptions of each of the jobs onto its own article, a "list of FFXI job classes" if you will - or to move the information onto the individual job's pages, which isn't going to work with the current preference here towards putting all the job info onto the list of FF classes. I happen to agree that the FF classes could pretty much all be merged into one article, but that leaves me with no place to put the FFXI info. Given that WoW has individual pages for EVERY job class, would I be remiss in saying that FFXI can have one more page for all of its job classes? -RaCha'ar 17:13, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well I certainly wouldn't call you remiss for it. 'Course, that's probably 'cause I think it's a good idea. We could just throw a link on the main character classes page that said something like "For Final Fantasy character classes in Final Fantasy XI, see the Final Fantasy XI character classes page." Seems like it would work out fine and is a problem easily solved.
By the way, it's not like there's really got to be more than four pages for FFXI as it is. All those expansion pages could -- and should -- be condensed into a single Final Fantasy XI Expansions page -- if not the main page itself -- which would leave -- aside from itself -- only the main page, the characters page, and the character classes page. Ryu Kaze 19:43, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would definitely support moving the FFXI class info to a seperate classes list, the information is too specific to sit comfortably on the general list. >Gamemaker 13:46, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Progress summary

Ok, so to summarise, the order of business is something like this:

  1. Standardise article names to Classname (Final Fantasy) and remove references to non-FF games
    1. Move misnamed articles dealing purely with FF info
    2. Split misnamed articles containing references to other games; into Classname (Final Fantasy) and Classname (character class)
  2. Describe the article layout above in the Style guide and standardise the notable articles
  3. Move FFXI info to the Final Fantasy XI character classes article
  4. Merge non-notable classes into the Final Fantasy character classes article
    1. If necessary, design a format for each entry in the list articles

If there're no disagreements so far, I guess we can get to work? >Gamemaker 13:18, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on #3 as we speak since I had a lot of the information prepared through work on the FFXI article. Gamemaker, you are awesome. Thank you so much for starting the FFXI character class article. A more detailed note will be left on your talk page.  :) -RaCha'ar 18:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Whoop, a question as I work on #3: Is it REALLY necessary to have all of the ninjutsu translations anywhere on Wiki? I know of places online that have the information and it seems to me that a link would do; I feel the information is a little much for just Wikipedia. Thoughts? -RaCha'ar 18:27, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Final_Fantasy/Review&oldid=41488502"